politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
He probably wasn't lying. Hunter was convicted for purely political reasons. The crimes he was convicted of are rarely enforced and almost never result in jail time against first offenders. The President assumed that his son would be treated fairly like any other first time offender. He believed in the sanctity of the justice system but has now been forced to revise that opinion because it's perfectly clear that he was wrong.
This is the same line trump supporters use when defending his convictions, and it probably is true for both. If your in politics you and your family are, and should be, under more legal scrutiny then an average person. That's the price of power.
Your family should not be under more scrutiny than anybody else and they should not be a target of your political enemies.
You're aware Biden is in charge of the DOJ right?
So he's admitting his DOJ was fucked up and acting in bad faith...
But rather than at any point since he realized that, he's choosing to only save his son and still not do any actual justice reform?
A regular person saving their son, ok. We get it
The literal one person able to save millions of sons? He should do actual reform.
He'd save his own son in the process too.
Like, you realize there's a shit ton of open judicial seats Biden is about to let trump seat as soon as he comes into office right?
Are you implying Biden appointed such shit people to lead the DOJ that he now trusts Trump's judgement more?
Like I said:
But if be really surprised if anyone actually explains why Biden not even appointing 30 judges is ok, let alone why the Senate not confirming 42 is bad.
Biden allowed the prosecution of Hunter to avoid the appearance of not being neutral.
Now that Trump has won and a) is openly talking about pardoning anyone and everyone and b) wanting to prosecute his enemies list, it 100% makes sense to beat him to the punch and pardon Hunter.
If Kamala had won, he would have let it all stand.
But the reality is he wasnt neutral...
So, when you portray a situation falsely because you know the blowback would hurt your chances in an upcoming election (Biden was the candidate then)
That is commonly referred to:
And when you do that for something everyone knows you're lying about, that's going to hurt turnout for the entire party, even if you do eventually shuffle off the stage before the election.
You may be 100% of with the only two parties only running liars
But if you want a way to make Dems able to win again, fight for honest authentic candidates who will help Americans.
You'll never find a neoliberal as good as lying as a Republican. So why play that game.
My opinion is obviously he wouldn't have. I'm not sure why your preventing your opinion as a fact, or even why you still think the next president somehow controls sentencing...
Like, you get that right?
That the entire premise for your argument about why this is ok has no factual basis?
If you think I'm wrong, by all means explain how the incoming president co trolls that, and how Biden wasn't able to control it now for a fair result and not an all or nothing like you're presenting
Oh, he definitely wasn't neutral, no father could be, that's why I say he was trying to avoid the APPEARANCE of not being neutral. ;)
Now that Trump has won and is talking crazy shit, there's no need to maintain appearances.
Are you seriously upset that Biden pardoned his son's charges of checking the no box to the do you use drugs question on his firearm application. And paying his taxes late?
That's gotta be every single weed smoker in a recreational state.
Oh he shuffled off stage all right. Right before the democratic wolve party beat him with a broomstick and replaced him with a pinata.
That poster basically lambasts Biden all the time. It's their whole schtick
Biden isn’t in charge of the DOJ…
Biden is in charge of the person in charge of the DoJ.
In charge of him in what way?
The Attorney General leads the DoJ and is a member of the president's cabinet. The DoJ is also part of the executive branch. While it is "bad form" for the president to order the AG to do something, the president can fire the AG. Look up what Nixon did to find out more.
Not just Nixon, if I remember right Trump tried to do something similar to stop the Mueller investigation. So why would Biden want to normalize weaponizing the DOJ like that?
The only people who consider Biden “in charge” of the DOJ are people that want to normalize Nixon’s and Trump’s behavior.
Biden didn't weaponize the DoJ. At no point did he use it to attack opponents who hadn't committed crimes as decided by grand juries. During Trump's trials he was, at least publicly, hands off and let the AG do his thing.
Don't confuse Biden giving his son a pardon after conviction with Nixon firing multiple AGs until he got to one that was fine with him being a literal criminal and Trump trying to find one (and succeeding) that wouldn't release a report on how Trump is corrupt.
This is not a both sides thing.
That was my point. The only thing Biden can do is fire the attorney general and threaten to replace them with an attorney general that will do his bidding. That is the only way Biden could control or be “in charge” of the DOJ.
Trump wasn’t “hands off” in any way: Six Takeaways From Trump’s Threats Against Rod Rosenstein
If Biden were to use his position as president to control the DOJ by threatening the attorney general, he would be normalizing Trumps actions of weaponizing the DOJ.
Not sure why you’re saying this. The person I responded to before you responded to me claimed Biden is in charge of the DOJ. I pointed out that he wasn’t because as we’ve both pointed out, the only way Biden can have any control over the DOJ is by replacing the Attorney General with someone that will do what he says. The same way Nixon and Trump did.